This page is a compendium of items of interest - news stories, scurrilous rumors, links, academic papers, damnable prevarications, rants and amusing anecdotes - about LAUSD and/or public education that didn't - or haven't yet - made it into the "real" 4LAKids blog and weekly e-newsletter at http://www.4LAKids.blogspot.com . 4LAKidsNews will be updated at arbitrary random intervals.

Friday, December 31, 2010

12/28/2010 - Los Angeles Unified School District is once again wrestling with its construction contracting and project delivery procedures. LAUSD canceled a pair of contracts in its $19.2-billion construction program in November when the LAUSD board citied violation of a no-subcontractor rule.

One contract was for $3.7 million to Consilia LLC for construction planning and the other for $90,000 to Kathi Littmann, former LAUSD chief of school construction for education specifications work. Littmann says staff told her that the contract had been awarded, cancelled and put back in place before LAUSD Superintendent Ramon Cortines stopped it for good. Littmann is now president of City Prep Education consulting and charter management in Los Angeles. She won Engineering News-Record’s 2003 ENR Award of Excellence for her work at LAUSD before she left in 2002. She sees the controversy as a bad sign for the school’s contracting environment.

“It’s just like 1999 [when Littmann started in the midst of a scandal over an $87-million high school being built on a toxic site]. There is no trust; the [school] board doesn’t understand the process and is interfering in contracting,” Littmann said. “It’s amazing how quickly it all unraveled.”

Littmann also expressed concerns that the board is attempting to shift risk to outside contractors. “That requires a sophisticated facilities manager, but too many of the experienced people are now gone,” Littmann said.

LAUSD Superintendent Ramon Cortines saw the confusion over the contracts as a miscommunication during a transition in the construction process. He explained that as the construction process is slowing down and the district is dealing with budget issues. The board wanted to emphasize using employees rather than contractors, he says, and made a no-subcontractors rule. “We didn’t do a very good job communicating board policy about not allowing subcontractors so the people who let the contracts were not aware of it,” Cortines said. “The contracts weren’t illegal, but they didn’t follow policy.”

Cortines emphasized that LAUSD still needs experienced contractors. “We just need to do it the right way,” he said.

The subcontractor debate was not the first time in 2010 that LAUSD came under scrutiny for contracting practices. In October, Los Angeles City Controller Wendy Greuel released the first-ever audit of LAUSD’s construction program at the request of Cortines. The auditors’ report found that from 2002 to 2005, LAUSD’s policies and oversight for how contractors was selected were “weak.” The program led to potential conflicts of interest, including 225 instances where a regional director sat on a panel that selected the person’s employer as a contractor. However, it noted that from 2006 on, the district had “undergone a dramatic improvement and has done a good job ensuring the integrity of the selection process.”

smf:Why should We Care?

This article is from a building trades and engineering publication with admittedly, a small and issue-specific audience – neither educators nor parents. However the message is clear and resonant to it’s audience – building and construction management firms that operate by contract building and modernizing public and private infrastructure – in this case our children's schools.

The message is this:LAUSD and its board of education unilaterally revokes legal contracts because of District contracting staff ‘s failures to adhere to internal guidelines and policy.

No allegations have been made that the contractors in these two contracts (Consilla and Dr. Littman) misbehaved or acted unethically – the misbehavior was by internal folk who cut corners, miscalculated or misperformed.

Yet it is the outside contactors who have been punished and had their contracts terminated and their good names dragged through the press.

Contractors rely on the good faith of their contract partners – and their own good hard-earned reputations to engender future work - and LAUSD has violated that faith and trust. The District has almost $6 billion in building and modernization contracts yet to award under Measure Q – and it has compromised its own good name as a ‘partner-of-choice’ through this unilateral action. This ultimately will cost the district dearly as some contractors will not bid on future LAUSD projects – and those that do will factor-in contingencies against this sort of thing.

BY GARY WALKER | The Argonaut

12.31.2010 - The California Board of Education has asked the state attorney general to investigate accusations of improper conduct during a proposed conversion to a charter school in Compton where members of the Parent Revolution, an organization that has actively pursued establishing a charter middle school in the Venice /Mar Vista area are involved.

The allegations stem from a recent attempt by the Parent Revolution to institute one of the first uses of the “parent trigger,” a new, somewhat controversial law that allows a majority of parents at a particular school to take over an institution or seek a conversion to a charter.

On Dec. 7, the parent organization, which is led by Ben Austin, its executive director and a former Green Dot Independent Charter board member, teamed up with a group of Compton parents to become the first school to employ the new state law that allows a school to be converted to charter if 60 percent of parents sign a petition requesting the change.

McKinley Elementary School has been called a “failing school “ by many and was seen by some reform advocates as a beachhead that would give more schools the impetus to initiate their own plans for improved student achievement.

The trigger law provides parents of pupils who are or will be enrolled in any failing school in California the option to petition their local school district to implement reform in the school.

“Accusations of rampant abuse, lying, and intimidation of parents in relation to this petition have recently come to the State Board of Education's attention. Apparently, there is direct evidence that school district employees used their positions of authority to intimidate and give false information to parents,” Theodore R. Mitchell, the state board president, wrote in a letter to state Attorney General Jerry Brown obtained by the Argonaut. “This behavior is clearly inappropriate and deeply troubling, no matter whether it is perpetrated by school district personnel, teachers, parents, or others.

“There can be no place in the Parent Empowerment process, or in any kind of open democratic process, for that kind of fear tactics and intimidation,” Mitchell continued. “As such, the state Board of Education believes that an investigation is needed to determine the validity of these allegations, identify the responsible parties, and determine if any laws have been violated.”

Mitchell asked Brown to investigate the collection of signatures for the petition, as well as any inappropriate behavior that may have occurred both before and since the petition was submitted to the school district.

San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris, who narrowly defeated Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley in November in the race for attorney general, will inherit the case from Brown, who will be sworn in as governor in January after defeating businesswoman Meg Whitman.

The letter was also sent to State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell and state Secretary of Education Bonnie Reiss.

Barbara Einstein, a Venice parent who is a board member of the Parent Revolution, said she does not believe the allegations are true. “I am convinced that (other Parent Revolution members) didn't do anything wrong,” she said.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's office also weighed in on the charter controversy in a letter to Brown, and appeared to side with the parent reform group.

“I am respectfully requesting that you, as attorney general, immediately investigate these allegations of misinformation and intimidation and pursue any and all legal remedies necessary to preserve the rule of law,” the governor wrote.

Schwarzenegger, who backs the parent trigger, was dismayed over the events in Compton, including many of the accusations lodged by members of the Parent Revolution.

“I am very disturbed by recent reports that parents of students in McKinley Elementary School who supported the parent trigger petition have been subjected to threats and intimidation. The power these parents in Compton are using was lawfully given to them by our Legislature in bipartisan legislation passed and signed into law last year,” the governor wrote. “Instead of being supported in their effort to ensure that their children get the quality education that is a constitutional right, these parents have been subjected to threats and a misinformation campaign. These intimidation tactics are being used in an effort to persuade them to take back their signatures.”

United Teachers Los Angeles President A.J. Duffy applauded the actions of the state board of education. “I'm glad to see that the attorney general has been asked to be involved in this,” Duffy, who has clashed with what he calls similar tactics on behalf of the Parent Revolution, told The Argonaut. “UTLA strongly believes in active parent engagement in any reform effort, but unlike the Parent Revolution, we're not just concerned with winning or losing; we're concerned about what leads to improved student achievement.”

UTLA and Austin's group wrangled previously over what one side considers parental empowerment and the other characterizes as a “giveaway” of public schools to charters and outside operators. Last September, the Los Angeles Unified School District Board of Education voted 6-1 for the “School Choice Initiative,” which allows charter schools, independent school operators and even LAUSD to take over what the school district classifies as “failing schools” in the hope of improving student achievement.

The initiative was backed by the Parent Revolution and by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who campaigned throughout the city for the proposal last year.

In February, the local school plans, backed by UTLA, won in 25 out of 29 elections in an advisory vote and 87 percent of voting parents preferred the union plans, prompting accusations of unethical practices by teachers and their allies from the Parent Revolution.

Parent Revolution Deputy Director Gabe Rose said his organization has evidence that parents who signed the petition in Compton were subjected to threats and intimidation, tactics that echo what Duffy claims members of the Parent Revolution have engaged in on prior occasions.

“We welcome an investigation,” Rose said. “We have documented proof of these threats made by members of the school staff.”

Duffy countered that he has heard from parents who are not in favor of the charter movement who allege that some school principals who are receptive to charters have given names to the Parent Revolution to contact.

In his letter, Schwarzenegger touched on some of the most damaging allegations reported by Compton parents who support the parent trigger law. “Parents have been told that supporting the petition will lead to their children being thrown out of school or charged tuition - claims that are completely false,” he wrote. “Undocumented parents have allegedly been told that supporting the reform effort will even lead to their deportation from this country.”

LAUSD board member Steve Zimmer, who represents Westchester, Venice, Mar Vista and Del Rey in District 4, said the volley of accusations back and forth in Compton are a direct result of a law that is not clearly defined. “There are some real flaws in the ‘parent trigger' law that leaves the door wide open to this type of (controversy),” Zimmer told The Argonaut. “School communities can successfully have change when all stakeholder groups have full and complete access, not when only one stakeholder group has access.”

Duffy said the accusations made by Compton parents that members of the Parent Revolution were the parties that were engaging in intimidation and scare tactics “ clearly shows a pattern, which is parents being engaged in conversations about things that are not accurate.”

Nicholas Schweizer, the executive director of the state board, said Mitchell's request was to ask the attorney general to investigate the entire situation that occurred in Compton, not solely allegations made on behalf of either group. “The state board is not taking sides in this dispute,” Schweizer clarified.

Mitchell's requests also asks the attorney general to determine whether there have been any violations of civil rights or other laws, and to take whatever action is deemed necessary and appropriate.

Asked if she thought the controversy in Compton would thwart efforts in Venice and Mar Vista for a charter school, Einstein, whose four daughters attend Walgrove Elementary School in Mar Vista, responded, “I don't have any worries that this will affect our ability to start a charter school. I don't think that there will be any kind of backlash.”

Rose agrees. “Parents have been working very hard on the Westside for change,” he said. “The only common thread between what happened in Compton and here is that parents are standing up to demand better schools for their kids.”

Zimmer also welcomes the investigation and thinks that it might yield some interesting information. “I think that when you have a radically new public policy like the parent trigger law, the more eyes that are carefully examining how it's playing out could lead to a better law,” he said.

Duffy says he hopes the investigation is not only a cursory probe. “I hope that it goes very deep,” he said. “It's about time the public saw what's going on, which is an effort to siphon away the best students to charter schools.”

In February after the advisory vote on the Public School Choice Initiative, Zimmer made a statement that could shed light on why the two sides appear to be locked in an education reform struggle that has at times resembled warfare.

“When you declare war on people, you have to expect them to act like combatants,” Zimmer stated. “UTLA is acting like a combatant, and when you declare war on someone it is unrealistic to expect them to act in a different way.

“I had hoped that the Parent Revolution would have forged a different path, but they showed no willingness or openness for a different path.”

Daily Breeze Editorial

12.29.2010 - In an ideal world, the Los Angeles Unified School District wouldn't need to tap corporate sponsors to pay for sports programs, Academic Decathlon or field trips. There would be enough money to cover these important enrichment and extracurricular activities that help round out an education.

But, there is nothing ideal about the LAUSD these days.

The district had already gone through multiple rounds of layoffs, cutting teachers and school support staff. The remaining employees are taking unpaid furlough days and the school year has been cut to save money. The staggering state budget deficit this year will surely mean even more painful cuts.

In light of those challenges that threaten to undermine the strength and promise of public schools, it's hard to get worked up over some corporate sponsorships of facilities or class trips. Especially when that company money could save $18 million a year worth of services.

Yes, selling corporate sponsorships is a Band-Aid. It's doesn't address or really help the overall financial crisis that is truly jeopardizing public education.

But we'll take a Band-Aid wherever we can get it these days.

Let's give the LAUSD leadership some credit. They don't want to sell out kids or turn over schools to crass marketing schemes. They don't intend to accept advertising that is unhealthy or not appropriate for youngsters - so, in theory, no Red Bull banners or McDonald's-sponsored field trips.

Proposals could include placing logos in lunchroom cafeterias or along the football field. Companies can also "buy" naming rights with their donations, so you may attend a recital in the Kodak Auditorium at the local high school or your children could type up their reports in the Dell Computer Lab.

Purists fear that the LAUSD is selling access to children's minds in order to cover the bills. But, most kids today have grown up exposed to advertising and marketing campaigns - when they watch television, ride in cars down the street, visit the mall.

It's hard to know how much these messages sink in. Does the proliferation of advertising simply become white noise or background scenery in a child's world?

But these are questions for different times. Right now, if LAUSD is deciding between canceling an Academic Decathlon program or firing the art teacher versus accepting corporate sponsorships to fund those programs, the choice is clear.

Bring on the money.

smf:Tellingly, this editorial was supported by advertising on the the Daily Breeze website.

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Jim Newton, LA Times Op-Ed |

December 28, 2010 - Los Angeles Unified School District Supt. Ramon C. Cortines is the rare member of this region's body politic who has mastered the correct response to his agency's challenges: He has devoted himself wholeheartedly to his work and managed it with harnessed, constructive rage.

Cortines is preparing to leave LAUSD, and his impending departure places the district in a precarious position. Under his stewardship, test scores at Los Angeles schools improved despite gigantic budget shortfalls. And at the same time, Cortines made structural changes that improved the district's management. His record will be hard for a successor to match.

Last week, Cortines and I met at district headquarters to discuss his tenure. We talked in his exquisitely modest office — a small, nondescript room filled with standard-issue office furniture. There's a map of the district on one wall, a writing board on another, and nothing else; absent are the proclamations and pictures of famous people that adorn the offices of the self-important. As we spoke, Cortines sometimes paused to gaze out at the rain and other times became so animated that he prowled the carpet, pacing and rapping on the wall for emphasis. He's a thinker, and a restless one.

Cortines is 78 years old, a veteran of school districts that include Pasadena, New York, San Francisco, San Jose and Los Angeles, where he also served a six-month stint as interim superintendent in 2000. He is energetic and candid, and connected to the district at its grass-roots. His surprise visits to campuses, during which he inspects classrooms with the keen eye of a self-described "neat freak," have been a staple of his tenure.

"I almost always visit the cafeteria," he said in our talk. "Is it as clean as my kitchen? Are the women in uniform? How do they treat the children?"

Not everything has gone well under Cortines, who returned to LAUSD in 2008. Progress, as measured by test scores, has been notable in elementary schools, spottier in higher grades. His tussles with an intransigent teachers union have been frustrating for both sides. His relationship with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has been uneven, as the mayor and district have occasionally bickered over their shared responsibility for a group of schools that includes the mayor's alma mater, Roosevelt High.

But Cortines is a tough infighter, strengthened by his national reputation and willingness to say out loud what others only whisper. Regarding Villaraigosa, he stressed his appreciation for the mayor, whom he once served as a deputy, but also complained that his former boss sometimes takes the district for granted. "It's not the mayor's partnership," he said of the schools he and Villaraigosa oversee together. "It's a partnership for Los Angeles."

As that remark suggests, Cortines has navigated Los Angeles' dense politics with a style uniquely his own. Where many leaders arrive for an editorial board meeting with a retinue of political or security aides, Cortines comes alone. During our discussion, he was interrupted once for a phone call, but otherwise spoke for nearly two hours, never asking to go off the record. A press aide sat outside but never entered the office.

Politicians crave his approval, but he grants it sparingly. "A lot of political types want to use the system," he said. "They want photo ops at schools, but I don't go to them. How does that improve third-grade reading?" Education, he says with characteristic verve, is not about "short, cryptic sentences." It is about service to the classroom, responsibility for the betterment of children.

He sees strength in the district's rank-and-file, its teachers and principals, bus drivers and technicians. He agrees with Villaraigosa that teachers have been poorly represented by their union, United Teachers Los Angeles. In fact, the day we talked, he had finally run out of patience with UTLA over $17 million in federal money for some of the district's poorest campuses. UTLA dragged its feet on extending the school day at campuses receiving the money. When the federal government threatened to take the money back, Cortines acted on his own. "I've given approval," he said. "If they want to take me to court, fine."

Cortines prides himself on his independence and his toughness. But he melts when he talks about teaching. He recalls with obvious joy his own days spent in classrooms, and he relishes seeing excellent teachers in action. He remembers one visit to the 122nd Street Elementary School where a teacher was eliciting the elegant participation of her students. Cortines, unimpressed by politicians or power, was moved. "For the first time," he remembered, "I knew what Socrates felt."

Cortines will leave with unfinished work. Although the district has improved test scores even as he's been forced to cut $1.5 billion in spending, poor children still struggle, and the affluent often leave at the first opportunity. He knows further improvement will require sustained attention.

I told him I worried that his departure might offer those resistant to change their chance to backslide. He looked out the window for a while at that and then agreed: "You're right to be worried."

smf's 2¢ from 24º53' N, 45º18' W: Jim Newton is writing here as The Times' Editor at Large: one must assume he represents the LA's Times' official opinion. No mention here is made of Cortines successor-apparent, superintendent-in-waiting John Deasy - and one must read something into this failure-to-mention and the admonition on the degree-of-difficulty of the threat in the impending succession. If Cortines is to exit on or about April 1 as he has announced the Board of Ed should be in the midst of a superintendent search now...and they are not. So one (these 'ones" can easily be substituted with the first person singular, '(un)conventional wisdom' or 'the handwriting on the wall', as is your wont) assumes that it is the intent of the Board of Ed to appoint Dr. Deasy as interim-supe and omit, postpone or cancel a national search in a bit of penny-wise/pound-foolishness.

The LAUSD Board of Education's most important job is the selection of the superintendent.

The Board of Education of the City of Los Angles is the most important school board in the nation and a national search is really what is called for. If Dr. Deasy is the right person - and indeed he may be - he would rise to the top in the search process. Of course, a national search would rise the specter of Michelle Rhee (the Sarah Palin of public education) coming to LA ...but - hey - bring her on!

The $578 million price tag for the Robert F. Kennedy Community Schools complex in Los Angeles is hard to justify at a time when many schools are turning to desperate measures to save teachers' jobs. Voters must respond by pushing profligate public schools to be as frugal as charter schools.

December 27, 2010 at 8:43 am EST - Los Angeles — Faced with the need to make drastic cuts to avoid looming budget holes as federal stimulus money runs out, school districts across the country are resorting to once-unthinkable solutions. Officials are turning to desperate measures to save the jobs of teachers, whose livelihoods were long considered secure.

In Boston, the superintendent has chosen to close nine schools and merge eight others into four buildings in light of a potential $63 million shortfall next year. School officials in Camp Hill, Pa., are so eager to raise funds that they've offered to sell naming rights to their gyms ($250,000 each), the library ($150,000), and even the counseling office ($15,000).

New studies indicate that thousands of other school districts will be forced to follow suit unless there is another federal infusion of cash. This is troubling because it sends a clear message to children that everything is for sale.

DIDN'T SAVE FOR A RAINY DAY

Yet states have to assume their share of responsibility for the way they've used the $100 billion in federal stimulus funds they received soon after President Obama took office. Most of the money – $40 billion – was directed at shoring up the balance sheets of state education systems. The rest supported Title I funding for poor students, programs for disabled students, and smaller programs like the Obama administration's Race to the Top contest.

But according to a 50-state survey conducted by the National Conference of State Legislatures and reported in The New York Times, 20 states said they intended from the very outset to spend all of their stabilization funds in the 2008-09 and 2009-10 school years. On average, all 50 states spent 86 percent of the federal stimulus money in the past two years, leaving just 14 percent for this year. Such short-sighted budgeting in the midst of the Great Recession is hard to defend.

Whatever sympathy might be felt for schools in these hard times was further dampened by jaw-dropping examples of profligacy in other districts. The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), the nation's second largest, serves as a case study of how to undermine taxpayer confidence when it is desperately needed.

The district spent $578 million – or about $135,000 per student – to construct the Robert F. Kennedy Community Schools complex on the site of the former Ambassador Hotel. This amount made the project the most expensive school ever constructed in US history at a time when the district is flat broke. (Indeed, just last week, the LAUSD school board voted unanimously to seek corporate sponsorships to pay for school programs like sports, music, and art.)

Although the LAUSD committed to this project before the enormity of the recession became apparent, the Kennedy complex is only the latest in the district's building binge of 131 schools.

It calls into question the way taxpayer money is spent. For example, The Wall Street Journal noted that another recently opened public school – the Visual and Performing Arts High School – was originally budgeted at $70 million. It ended up costing $232 million.

Nevertheless, voters in L.A. continue to approve such spending, in the process becoming enablers. Indeed, since 1997, they have OK'd more than $20 billion in school bonds

The only hard evidence of discontent is the support taxpayers have given to the establishment of charter schools. The LAUSD has more charter schools than any other school system in the country, enrolling about 9 percent of its students. Strictly from a financial viewpoint, charter schools are, without question, a bargain. They can be constructed for a quarter of the cost of most schools in the district.

CHARTER SCHOOLS: GREAT BANG FOR THE BUCK

For example, Green Dot Public Schools, a leading charter school operator in the L.A. area, has built seven schools there to serve 4,300 mainly low-income students for a total of less than $85 million. Its graduation rate is nearly twice that of the school district as a whole.

It's true that charter schools don't have to enroll special education students. But there's another factor given short shrift in the debate. Under Proposition 39, which was passed by California voters in 2000, districts are obligated to provide charter schools with facilities that are reasonably equivalent to those of other schools in the district.

About 60,000 students in the LAUSD attend charter schools. But administrators have dragged their feet on meeting the "reasonably equivalent" standard. They do so by denying charter schools the use of existing facilities. As a result, many have had to rent space. That eats up about 13 percent of their general funds on average, a recent Los Angeles Times commentary notes.

As long as lack of prudence characterizes fiscal policy, school districts everywhere will remain in dire straits. But let's not forget that, ultimately, voters possess the power to demand financial reform. If they don't, then they have no basis for complaint.

- Walt Gardner taught for 28 years in the Los Angeles Unified School District and was a lecturer in the UCLA Graduate School of Education. His Reality Check blog is published in Education Week.

smf: The subhead "Charter Schools, Great Bang for the Buck" has the tell-tale odor-on-the-breath that someone has been into the Charter Kool Aid. First, Green Dot spending $85 million to build 7 schools to educate 4300 is a comparison of apples-to-rhinoceroses of Kafkaese proportions. Green Dot Schools are not built to the building standards that LAUSD schools must be ...hopefully this will not become tragically apparent after the next big earthquake. Green Dot, while it prides itself in operating in the inner city does not address the percentage of English Language Learners or Special Ed Students that LAUSD must. And Green Dot in the past year has shut down one of its inner city schools because it was not fiscally viable - Can you imagine LAUSD going into a neighborhood and saying "we cannot afford to educate these children? Green Dot's business model relies on creaming-off the most English fluent, least in need of special education services and most parentally engaged students - then brings in extra outside money and celebrates that the best and brightest outperform the rest! Altogether now:: Duh! Earlier I said Green Dot operates in the inner city, but I question whether it really serves those communities - rather it capitalizes on LAUSD's historic failure to identify and nurture high-achieving students in low achieving schools. And capitalizing is what capitalism is all about!

The criticism pointed at school districts who didn't save their Stimulus Dollars for a rainy day miss totally the intent of the stimulus - which was to stimulate the economy right now ...not at some moment in the future. I don't believe that sophomore class in political economy made me an economist - but it was the banks (and others) that banked their stimulus dollars instead of circulating them that arrested the recovery.

The criticism of the voters and taxpayers of L.A. for supporting the bonds and thereby enabling "overspending" is hogwash - and I'm being extremely kind.

By Kerry Cavanaugh, Columnist - LA Daily News

12/23/2010 - On Tuesday, I wrote about the pathetically low turnout in Los Angeles City Council races. Someone can be elected to the council, earn $179,000 a year and manage a staff of 20 with fewer than 5,000 votes.

But the picture is much worse when it comes to the Los Angeles Unified District Board of Education elections. In some races, just 4 percent of registered voters bother to fill out a ballot for the winning candidate.

These are the people who oversee the nation's second-largest school district and make the policy and financial decisions that affect the education of some 678,000 children and teenagers. Yet, the vast majority of parents of the children enrolled in Los Angeles public schools don't vote for board members.

On March 8, four of the seven seats on the Board of Ed are up for grabs. Here is my Christmas wish. May you vote in the March election – especially if you are an LAUSD parent, but even if you're not.

All elections are important, but this one is particularly critical. With the state funding for education likely to be cut again this coming year, the LAUSD board will face difficult choices about what programs get funded and what jobs get cut.

Likewise, there's a strong reform movement in L.A., and the LAUSD board will make key decisions, such as whether student test scores should affect teacher evaluations and who should run local schools – the district or charter organizations.

These decisions could dramatically change public schools in L.A. in a matter of years, and if you have children or care about children, then you have a stake LAUSD governance.

But so few people vote in school board races – it's almost as if Angelenos have already written off the LAUSD, which would be a terrible mistake.

Here are the winning results from the 2007 and 2009 elections – odd number seats were elected in 2007 and even numbered seats in 2009.:

Kerry Cavanaugh is an editorial writer and columnist for the Los Angeles Daily News.

smf: Cavanauagh has it exactly right. And in addition to the budget challenges the next Board of Ed must address the selection and/or ratification of the next superintendent and the redistricting of board districts. This last is especially important as the current board seems to be taking a more and more politically territorial approach to "their" board districts, looking at them less as electoral constituent parts of the bigger district and more as as politico-educational fiefdoms.("My schools")

12/19/2010 01:00:00 AM PST - THERE has been tons of finger-pointing lately as to whom, exactly, is to blame for failing schools: the unions, or the lousy teachers, or the lack of funds. Sometimes, the parents get placed in those cross hairs for too little participation, the idea being that, if parents could just volunteer and help kids with homework, the school's problems would magically dissipate.

Well, it looks like parent participation is up, at least at two failing Los Angeles-area schools, but it doesn't involve bake sales. Thanks to the Parent Trigger Law, parents with children at failing McKinley Elementary School in Compton and Mt. Gleason Middle School in Sunland-Tujunga have a very proactive method of involvement.

The Parent Trigger Law allows a majority of parents at failing schools to organize significant change. They can force their school district to find a new principal, replace staff and/or give financial oversight to the community. They can demand smaller changes or that the school be closed completely and reopened as a charter.

For a school to be eligible for the parent trigger, it must have an Academic Performance Index score of less than 800 and be classified as one of the lowest 5 percent of schools in the state. A majority of parents at a school must sign an official parent trigger petition.

All this information is easily obtainable through the website of Parent Revolution, a grass-roots nonprofit organization that specializes in helping shepherd parents through the process.

At McKinley Elementary, an impressive 61 percent of parents signed the trigger petition. Their demand? That Celerity Educational Group, a charter school group consisting of three successful schools, take over McKinley.

The school would serve the same student population as before, but the major management decisions, from teacher hiring and firing to curriculum and policy, would be in Celerity's hands. The parents aren't just looking for API test score gains; they want more control over teacher absences, a tighter grip on student whereabouts (students were leaving campus), and a crackdown on teacher insults aimed at students.

In Sunland-Tujunga, a similar situation is brewing at Mt. Gleason Middle School, where fed-up parents are trying to wield the same stick.

Giving parents the power to set this in motion is the ultimate parent school involvement. Naturally, school districts and teachers unions such the California Federation of Teachers aren't thrilled with this turn of events. The CFT president referred to the parent trigger as a "lynch mob law," offensive wording when applied to a school in Compton.

Unfortunately, the Parent Trigger Law might be too good to be true for these parents seeking lasting educational reform. There's a catch. A little advertised provision in the law allows local school boards to make a unilateral veto of Parent Trigger Law demands through a simple public hearing, thus avoiding the substantive changes parents might want to implement, like charter conversion.

It seems impossible that the boards of education of the Compton Unified School District or the Los Angeles Unified School District would let a public school slip away, losing union positions and funding, when there's such a simple way to overrule it.

LAUSD, it turns out, demands parental involvement only when it suits the district. Parents are good for toiling in the classrooms and raising extra funds. When parents do actually organize, petition and demand change through law, districts wants their voices silenced.

It remains to be seen whether parents will finally have the power to enact real change for their children's education. For now, it's up the district to decide whether it really respects parental involvement, or has just been giving it lip service all these years.

Jenny Heitz, a Los Angeles writer, is a former LAUSD parent who writes about gift ideas and products on her blog, Find A Toad.

Thursday, December 23, 2010

12/18/2010 - The tools to transform public education in California have been put into the hands of parents. What they do with them, next year especially, will dictate the future of education in California.

This month, in particular, has been a bit of a watershed for parent empowerment. It was the month in which the first use of the new Parent Trigger Law occurred in an elementary school in Compton. This law allows parents to organize to force changes - small or big - if their neighborhood schools are failing their children.

It was the month in which members of the LAUSD school board proposed the district craft a plan to encourage and reward parent engagement in a district that has effectively shut parents out.

It was the month that the second, and perhaps most important, round of Los Angeles Unified's groundbreaking School Choice Program's collected opening bids from groups that want to take control of failing schools.

Parents can have tremendous power to influence which new operators are picked to run the 13 schools open for new management.

In many ways, parents are being handed the reigns of power and the possibility to transform education for their kids and those not even born yet. Hopefully, they will use their power well - and wisely.

To be sure, there are many entrenched groups trying to influence parents - some with sincerity, others with threats. Parents in Compton are experiencing that firsthand, as they find themselves

Advertisement

in the middle of a reform battle that could well decide the fate of the state.

Compton's McKinley Elementary School was picked for the first use of the parent trigger because it is among the the absolutely worst-performing schools in the state. Parents don't have much to lose by throwing out the current bureaucracy and seeking a charter school.

Because so much is riding on the first use of the Parent Trigger Law, which is so new that even its regulations aren't final yet, the movement is being closely watched across the nation. And what they are seeing is a brutal fight. A necessary majority of parents signed the parent trigger petitions, but there seems to be a coordinated attack against it by teachers and possibly the Compton Unified School District. Some parents say they were confronted by angry and abusive teachers in front of their kids. However, others claim they were misled by the Parent Revolution organizers. A few parents - though not yet enough to stop the effort - have rescinded their signatures on the petitions. But if the parents in Compton can't hold strong until early next year, more parents, under fire, might fold.

How the Compton battle is resolved could well determine the future of this one tool of empowerment. If other parents see the effort to transform McKinley fail, it might discourage any future efforts, in California and beyond.

Parents, more than anyone, have a stake in the quality of education. If they can stand tall against the forces that would shut them up, they can and will affect the future of education in California.

December 18, 2010, 5:10 p.m. - Pardon me, kids, but is it too much to ask that teachers union representatives, L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and L.A. Unified School District officials begin acting like adults?

Here we are, nearly certain to see more budget cuts and layoffs at schools in the spring — and possibly for years to come — and I'm not hearing anyone talk seriously about how to proceed with the least amount of damage to the children.

We've got UTLA officials flat-out refusing to give an inch on reforms that are being adopted throughout the country.

And we've got school board members whose only idea of how to deal with the looming crisis is to try to raise a few measly bucks by selling branding rights to corporations. Don't be surprised if your child's graduation ceremony is held in Chevron Auditorium at Halliburton High.

Thanks, but no thanks. Can't we preserve what little innocence is left in our children, rather than remind them we don't value their education enough to support it without corporate marketing campaigns?

If the school board wanted to do something productive about corporate support, it would take the lead in ending the huge property tax advantage that corporations enjoy in California. Commercial property got the same benefits from Proposition 13 as residential property did. But because their land doesn't change hands as often, many big businesses in the state pay property taxes based on a fraction of the true value.

Every time I mention Prop. 13, I get buried under complaints from people claiming they were about to be taxed out of their homes before the tax-cutting proposition was passed in 1978. Yes, tax relief was needed for thousands of Californians. But it didn't need to be as drastic as it was, and corporations shouldn't have gotten the same deal.

With California now ranked 47th in the nation in funding per student, it's time for school boards across the state to tell the incoming governor to push for a "split roll" that would differentiate between homeowners and corporate landowners. Jerry Brown has been warning of fiscal disaster that's worse than he imagined, and he's asking the right questions: What do we value and want to pay for, and how do we intend to pay for it?

Whatever the answers, I'm guessing they won't come soon enough to head off another round of layoffs in L.A. Unified and beyond. And that means that more teachers could be let go regardless of their ability in the classroom, based on nothing but years of service.

Teachers are right: They're made out to be the villains in the current national conversation on public education, when, in fact, parents, students, principals, administrators and money are all part of both the problem and the solution.

Halfway through my daughter's third year in a terrific L.A. Unified public school, I've got a great appreciation of teachers. The range of student abilities and behavior issues in classrooms is staggering, and a tough job is made harder as support services are stripped away one after another.

But just as principals and administrators are not created equal, neither are teachers, as UTLA would have you believe. It seems to me they all would benefit from a system that examines why certain teachers are better at classroom management or teaching fifth-grade math and then rewards them by bumping up their pay, while giving more training to those who need it.

I've heard all the arguments against the value-added system in which teachers are graded on their students' test score improvements, and they have some merit: there are lots of variables in a classroom, test scores don't necessarily measure learning and value-added isn't perfect.

But nobody said it is. LAUSD has proposed that just 30% of a teacher's evaluation be based on test scores.

UTLA's position?

Test scores shouldn't go into evaluations at all.

End of discussion.

Really? Couldn't tests account for a mere 10% to 20% of an evaluation?

There's no evidence kids are benefiting from the inability of the grownups to compromise. Ted Mitchell, chair of the state Board of Education, said the two sides ought to be able to find some mutually beneficial common ground. If the UTLA doesn't bend a bit, he said, "it's going to be the laggard" as other districts enjoy the extra freedoms and money tied to reform.

UTLA has to do something other than say "no." It should long ago have come up with a better evaluation system to avoid being force-fed one.

Goldberg said the union has been working on a better system, and he referred me to the union's 10-point policy statement on the subject.

Frankly, I wasn't impressed. The statement is high on general beliefs and short on practical details.

OK, parents, teachers, readers, taxpayers and citizens of the world, I've got a question for you:

Would you support a system in which 20% of a teacher's evaluation is based on test scores, 80% is based on peer review by teachers and administrators, those who score the highest get raises, those who score the lowest get training, principals get evaluated as vigorously and as often as teachers, and layoffs, when necessary, are based on a combination of seniority and performance?

Let me know what you think, and I'll make sure the district and the union hear what you have to say.

December 18, 2010 at 9:39 a.m., updated December 18, 2010 at 10:08 a.m.— LOS ANGELES (AP) - It's no secret that students do better in school if their parents are involved in their education, but getting them interested is a challenge that makes Haydee Escajera roll her eyes and sigh.

"It's very difficult," said Escajera, who recruits parents as volunteers at Manual Arts High School, located in impoverished central Los Angeles. "It's not just that they're busy, even parents who don't work aren't interested."

Getting parents involved in their kids' education is a steep uphill battle at high schools serving urban neighborhoods, where parents are often overwhelmed by the need to make ends meet.

But those are the parents who need most to be involved to steer teens away from the inner city's ready lures of gangs, drugs and dropping out.

The conumdrum has long plagued urban school districts like Los Angeles Unified, which are under federal mandate to involve parents.

District leaders now aim to try a new model - forming "Parent and Family Centers" that offer everything from self-esteem improvement to nutrition workshops to citizenship classes at schools.

The concept is that boosting parents will lead to a healthier home environment and ultimately higher student achievement, said Christopher Downing, LAUSD administrator of school family, parent, and community services. "We have to work smarter to reach those parents," he said.

So-called "parent academies" are used in other urban districts across the nation with varying degrees of success, experts said. Most provide educational and parenting-type workshops, such as applying to college or spotting drug use, but do not offer the social programming LAUSD is considering.

Administrators are forming a task force to come up with a "family support network" plan over the next 90 days. Superintendent Ramon Cortines has said the cash-strapped district has no extra funds for the program, which would have to be financed using existing federal parent involvement grants, roughly $2 million a year.

School board member Yolie Flores, the plan's major proponent, said the program, which is in place at a couple schools, would not entail additional costs. A main component would be a database that parents could consult for information on everything from legal aid to English classes to domestic violence counseling. Nonprofits and community groups, and city and county agencies would be tapped to give workshops at no or little cost.

"It's another way to connect with parents," she said. "We can make this a point of access."

Providing social services is only part of the solution to involving parents, which includes training teachers to welcome parents without talking down to them, and telling parents specifically how they can help their children in school, said Joyce Epstein, director of the Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships at Johns Hopkins University.

Others said schools typically offer programs when most parents can't attend - during school hours. The key is surveying parents to find out what services they want and offering them at convenient times for parents, said Mary Johnson, founder of LA parent advocacy group Parent U-Turn. Child care is also a plus.

"They offer them in the mornings and then say no one came," Johnson said. "You need to build what they want and then they will come."

Experiences at schools like Manual Arts, among California's lowest performing high schools, underscore that attempts to involve parents are often hit and miss.

The 3,600-student school, with a dropout rate of nearly 30 percent, started stepping up its efforts last year to try to interest more parents, who are typically some of the toughest to reach. Many are Spanish-speaking immigrants who have little schooling. They encounter a language barrier with teachers, and can feel condescended to by English-speakers.

Academic subjects, such as algebra, are beyond their comprehension. College appears far out of their financial reach.

If they are in the country illegally, they may be afraid to enter an official institution like a school. Laws requiring fingerprinting and background checks for some volunteers dissuade some.

Tucked away in a classroom on a far side of campus, the school's Parent Center served as little more than a coffee klatch for a small clique of mothers, said Ruby Guerrero, associate director of parent engagement for Mentor LA, a nonprofit educational group that runs the school with the district.

Mentor LA moved the center to a more visible spot in an administrator's office near the main entrance, and stocked it with books and pamphlets on parenting and colleges, in Spanish and English, plus three computers equipped with information on everything from tutoring assistance to medical clinics.

Community and local government groups provide free programs - in Spanish and English. Fliers are sent home with students and volunteers phone parents to personally urge them to come.

The result has been a slow trickle of parents. On a recent morning, 10 gathered around a table to listen to two speakers outline options for college financing in an hourlong workshop in Spanish. When the bell rang for class change, a couple students passed by and waved to their parents through the open door.

For many participants, the session was a dizzying first lesson about the complex U.S. higher education system - the difference between two-year and four-year colleges, state and private universities, financial aid and loans. "We need a three-hour workshop," said father Miguel Fuentes.

But across campus, no one showed up at a session on drug and alcohol prevention.

Unemployed mother Maria Rodriguez, who attended the college financing workshop, said more classes should be offered at night so more people can attend.

"It's excellent," the Mexican native said. "No one in my family has gone to college, and I really want my son to go. They should do a lot more of these."

The most popular workshop so far was an evening series on tenant's rights that brought in a rarely seen group - fathers. Organizers took advantage and brought in guidance counselors to speak to the 40 dads about their kids' report cards after one session, although that's not the norm.

At a school like Manual Arts, where parent activity was next to nil, reaching 40 parents was deemed a huge success.

School board member Flores said she sees a lot of potential in the Manual Arts model, especially with district support. "All parents care," she said. "But I don't know if they understand how critical their role is."

Escajera said she's thrilled at the new impetus. "I just got five fathers to sign up as volunteers," she said, smiling. "But I still wish I had a kind of magnet to pull parents in."

Folks need to understand the difference between:

recruiting parent volunteers - parent volunteers do things for the school

and parent involvement and engagement in the education of their children. For the kids.

It is the third that is called for – and it isn’t so easy as taking a half-hearted stab at the first two.

12/18/2010 10:53:13 AM PST -- LOS ANGELES -- It's no secret that students do better in school if their parents are involved in their education, but getting them interested is a challenge that makes Haydee Escajera roll her eyes and sigh.

"It's very difficult," said Escajera, who recruits parents as volunteers at Manual Arts High School, located in impoverished central Los Angeles. "It's not just that they're busy, even parents who don't work aren't interested."

Getting parents involved in their kids' education is a steep uphill battle at high schools serving urban neighborhoods, where parents are often overwhelmed by the need to make ends meet.

But those are the parents who need most to be involved to steer teens away from the inner city's ready lures of gangs, drugs and dropping out.

The conunmdrum has long plagued urban school districts like Los Angeles Unified, which are under federal mandate to involve parents.

District leaders now aim to try a new model — forming "Parent and Family Centers" that offer everything from self-esteem improvement to nutrition workshops to citizenship classes at schools.

The concept is that boosting parents will lead to a healthier home environment and ultimately higher student achievement, said Christopher Downing, LAUSD administrator of school family, parent, and community services. "We have to work smarter to reach those parents," he said.

So-called "parent academies" are used in other urban districts across the nation with varying degrees of success, experts said. Most provide educational and parenting-type workshops, such as applying to college or spotting drug use, but do not offer the social programming LAUSD is considering.

Administrators are forming a task force to come up with a "family support network" plan over the next 90 days. Superintendent Ramon Cortines has said the cash-strapped district has no extra funds for the program, which would have to be financed using existing federal parent involvement grants, roughly $2 million a year.

School board member Yolie Flores, the plan's major proponent, said the program, which is in place at a couple schools, would not entail additional costs. A main component would be a database that parents could consult for information on everything from legal aid to English classes to domestic violence counseling. Nonprofits and community groups, and city and county agencies would be tapped to give workshops at no or little cost.

"It's another way to connect with parents," she said. "We can make this a point of access."

Providing social services is only part of the solution to involving parents, which includes training teachers to welcome parents without talking down to them, and telling parents specifically how they can help their children in school, said Joyce Epstein, director of the Center on School, Family, and Community Partnerships at Johns Hopkins University.

Others said schools typically offer programs when most parents can't attend — during school hours. The key is surveying parents to find out what services they want and offering them at convenient times for parents, said Mary Johnson, founder of LA parent advocacy group Parent U-Turn. Child care is also a plus.

"They offer them in the mornings and then say no one came," Johnson said. "You need to build what they want and then they will come."

Experiences at schools like Manual Arts, among California's lowest performing high schools, underscore that attempts to involve parents are often hit and miss.

The 3,600-student school, with a dropout rate of nearly 30 percent, started stepping up its efforts last year to try to interest more parents, who are typically some of the toughest to reach. Many are Spanish-speaking immigrants who have little schooling. They encounter a language barrier with teachers, and can feel condescended to by English-speakers.

Academic subjects, such as algebra, are beyond their comprehension. College appears far out of their financial reach.

If they are in the country illegally, they may be afraid to enter an official institution like a school. Laws requiring fingerprinting and background checks for some volunteers dissuade some.

Tucked away in a classroom on a far side of campus, the school's Parent Center served as little more than a coffee klatch for a small clique of mothers, said Ruby Guerrero, associate director of parent engagement for Mentor LA, a nonprofit educational group that runs the school with the district.

Mentor LA moved the center to a more visible spot in an administrator's office near the main entrance, and stocked it with books and pamphlets on parenting and colleges, in Spanish and English, plus three computers equipped with information on everything from tutoring assistance to medical clinics.

Community and local government groups provide free programs — in Spanish and English. Fliers are sent home with students and volunteers phone parents to personally urge them to come.

The result has been a slow trickle of parents. On a recent morning, 10 gathered around a table to listen to two speakers outline options for college financing in an hourlong workshop in Spanish. When the bell rang for class change, a couple students passed by and waved to their parents through the open door.

For many participants, the session was a dizzying first lesson about the complex U.S. higher education system — the difference between two-year and four-year colleges, state and private universities, financial aid and loans. "We need a three-hour workshop," said father Miguel Fuentes.

But across campus, no one showed up at a session on drug and alcohol prevention.

Unemployed mother Maria Rodriguez, who attended the college financing workshop, said more classes should be offered at night so more people can attend.

"It's excellent," the Mexican native said. "No one in my family has gone to college, and I really want my son to go. They should do a lot more of these."

The most popular workshop so far was an evening series on tenant's rights that brought in a rarely seen group — fathers. Organizers took advantage and brought in guidance counselors to speak to the 40 dads about their kids' report cards after one session, although that's not the norm.

At a school like Manual Arts, where parent activity was next to nil, reaching 40 parents was deemed a huge success.

School board member Flores said she sees a lot of potential in the Manual Arts model, especially with district support. "All parents care," she said. "But I don't know if they understand how critical their role is."

Escajera said she's thrilled at the new impetus. "I just got five fathers to sign up as volunteers," she said, smiling. "But I still wish I had a kind of magnet to pull parents in."

12-17-2010 - Less money and diminished resources. Fewer instructional days. Summer school and after-school programs eliminated. Libraries and some school campuses closed. Thousands of teachers and classified employees fired. These are some education news stories that dominated 2010. (Los Angeles Times on recent classified employee layoffs, California Watch on shorter school year, Education Week on impact to summer schools, Sacramento Bee on fewer school nurses, KPCC on $10 billion federal stimulus to retain and rehire educators)

Political ironies are much overrated these days; however, we can note that the year of cuts was accompanied by a year of raised expectations. The federal government’s Race to the Top competition called on states and districts to pledge more action and better results (Christian Science Monitor). Perhaps the most attention-grabbing story of the year was the Los Angeles Timespublishing the so-called value-added scores of 3rd, 4th, and 5th grade teachers. Disclosure of testing results for teachers in these three grades was promised to improve instruction even as the supports for teaching and learning declined across all 12 grades. Little in the news covered schools’ struggles to accommodate cuts in effective teacher supervision, targeted professional development, and adequate books and materials for classrooms.

It was also a big year for “alternatives” that promised improved results at no additional costs; for example, ramping up the charter school movement as an alternative to public school systems even as charters produced negligible learning gains relative to regular public schools. (Washington Post blog on two reports on charters, Christian Science Monitor on oversimplification of “Waiting for Superman”)

When higher expectations (amidst declining resources) have little chance of being realized, they might more accurately be called “aspirations.” It is good to aspire to reach our dreams of high-quality education and high student performance, but what we expect has to be based on the practical, real-life conditions schools face. We may not like these actual low expectations, but we can’t wish them higher or pat ourselves on the back because we are making “progress.”

Affected by the deepest economic crisis of our generation, some California youth can’t concentrate on school while their families struggle with their food budgets. Unemployment in the household affects children in ways that school teachers, curriculum, and standards can barely touch. “We’re seeing a lot more kids just in a state of struggle all the way around with their basic needs,” said a high school principal interviewed this summer for a UCLA IDEA report. “That’s going to impact their academics because that’s not an immediate thing[.] Learning math today is not immediate whereas eating is.”

To get a real-time picture of how the economy was affecting students and services offered by the schools, UCLA IDEA surveyed and interviewed hundreds of high school principals across the state. The data, anecdotes, and analysis from this research are new features in IDEA’s California Educational Opportunity Report, which will be out in February.

To be sure, there are some policy-driven reforms and some moments of funding relief (federal stimulus funds in particular) that have muted school decline. However, Californians owe much to their schools, administrators, teachers and staff who make extraordinary efforts, each day and largely unseen, to address their students’ needs. Some schools have raised money to help pay for families’ rent or bills. They have donated food and clothes to students. Teachers have taken in homeless students. What once might have been called “heroic” efforts, today sound like the “new normal” as principals report efforts to patch together quality educational programs in the face of budget cuts, crowded classrooms and fewer teachers. “You know that the media almost never talks about that,” said one principal, “because it doesn’t sell newspapers, or T.V. commercials, but there’s a lot of good that is happening in our schools all the time, every day.”

2011 brings new leadership and new challenges. Gov.-elect Jerry Brown has announced that the budget crisis is deeper than he or the state’s analysts have realized. Without bold action, the pain of 2010 will be felt even more deeply this coming year. Yet, Brown and the public still hold high aspirations for California’s public schools. In order for realistic expectations to match our aspirations, the state must find a way to confront and reconcile its need for services with a willingness to pay for them.

Posted on 12/17/10 • Last month, State Board of Education President Ted Mitchell couldn’t get any votes for his plan to encourage districts to change the way they evaluate teachers and administrators. Education groups didn’t like the proposal any better.

But this week, with the California School Boards Association and the Association of California School Administrators now praising it, the Board unanimously adopteda new version that offers an incentive to districts willing to link evaluations with student achievement and good classroom practices.

The State Board’s role in what has become a national debate on evaluations is limited by state statutes and local bargaining. But there is one modest area – the authority to grant waivers from the onerous Ed Code – in which the State Board can offer a carrot. Under the new policy, schools or districts that create annual principal and teacher evaluations that meet a dozen broad criteria will be on a fast track to get waivers tied to improving student achievement.

The policy coincides with the efforts in some districts to adopt new evaluations. Mitchell himself led a task force in Los Angeles Unified whose recommendations have met resistance from United Teachers Los Angeles, the teachers union. (Mitchell explains why the State Board’s policy is important in a video interview I conducted; click here for it.)

One big stumbling block, which the union reaffirmed this week, is its opposition to using test scores as one of the measures. The State Board’s policy calls for using “no less than 30 percent based on growth in student achievement toward meeting grade-level proficiency.”* That’s the same percentage that the Obama administration favors and that Los Angeles Unified and the six other districts in the state’s Race to the Top application used. But the State Board’s policy said other measures could be used beside standardized test scores: “classroom work, student grades, classroom participation, student presentations and performance and student projects and portfolios.”

* smf:The L.A. Times “Value-added” methodology is based 100% on test scores.

In citing the California Teachers Association’s opposition to the policy, lobbyist Ken Burt said there is no evidence to support the 30 percent threshold and called the board’s policy “ideological, a matter of belief.”

But what appealed to the school boards and administrators associations and other groups is the policy’s recognition of the importance of other factors as well: “differentiated instruction and practices; culturally responsive instructional strategies to address and eliminate the achievement gap; high expectations and active student engagement; consistent and effective relationships with students, parents, teachers, administrators and other school and district staff; and meaningful self-assessment to improve as a professional educator.”

The policy requires that districts use the evaluations “to inform” all employment decisions, including tenure, promotion, and dismissal and in the distribution of highly effective teachers and administrators to minimize disparities between high- and low-poverty and minority schools.

Noting that a new Gates Foundation-funded study of teacher effectiveness concluded that students’ views of their teachers were good predictors of teacher effectiveness, the board is requiring that parents’ and students’ opinions also be a component of an evaluation.

A committee appointed by the State Board will determine whether districts’ evaluation systems qualify for the Ed Code waivers. Those waivers may relate to class size, instructional time, or daily schedules. Or districts could seek waivers from grant restrictions from which the Legislature hasn’t yet provided flexibility. What’s unknown is whether these waivers would be a strong enough attraction for districts and unions to pursue evaluations along the lines that the State Board prescribed.

The waivers would not be automatic anyway. An existing Waiver Office in the State Department of Education would continue to review districts’ requests and could recommend that the State Board not grant them. But the assumption would be that waivers would be put on the State Board’s consent calendar, making approval pro forma for those districts whose evaluation systems passed the review committee’s muster.

Friday, December 17, 2010

Pub: Dec 17, 2010 - Despite one school member’s wariness that a calendar change had limited parent input, the Los Angeles Unified School Board forged ahead and adopted a policy Tuesday to begin school Aug. 15 district wide – a decision that will impact thousands of students and their families.

The board voted 6-1 to begin school in one of the hottest months of the year -- mid-August in summer of 2011 while not all campuses have air conditioning. The only schools not included are those that remain on a multi-track calendar.

School Board Member Richard Vladovic, who heads the Harbor area and parts of northern Los Angeles, heatedly dissented.

In the lone no vote, Vladovic urged other board members to wait until more data had been collected and parents received more information and time to respond to the change.

“There was clearly not enough information given to parents about this calendar change,” said Vladovic, who is up for re-election in June. “Parents and families need to be part of the process. Though I think that educationally the early start calendar change makes sense, I supported the parents who have expressed to me that they have not been given enough information.”

The new calendar does not garner students any additional educational time. While Los Angeles Unified will start earlier in the year, students will be released at the beginning of June rather than toward the end of that month – as was done in the past.

Besides seeking further information from parents, Vladovic argued that the district should wait for such a change until all its schools were off multi-track, a system that school officials determined later to be a failure for its students, but was forced into due to intense overcrowding. With bond measures, the district has been able to build new schools and slowly return most schools to the traditional schedules, starting in September and ending in June.

Vladoic’s amendment – which asked for the board to allow school complexes by community to decide their fate -- died on the table.

LAUSD Superintendent Ramon Cortines said the district would incur higher costs by implementing the early start by complex, citing additional transportation and special education expenses.

David Kooper, Vladovic’s chief of staff, said it was ironic how the board voted after spending several hours earlier in the day debating how they could get parents involved and engaged.

And yet, families were only notified about this as a proposal in October on a Los Angeles Unified website.

“It’s not fair to families,” said Kooper, who added that he received emails from upset parents. “It is incredibly unfortunate for those families who already planned vacations. Now these families have to make the decision whether or not to cancel their trip and perhaps incur a cost in doing so or go on the trip and miss school. If this was done next year, this issue would not be a problem.

“This is a clear example of doing one thing and saying another.”

Should families decide to go on vacation the district will lose funds from ADA, or average daily attendance. States fund schools about $30 per day per student

One mother agreed with Kooper’s assessment.

“Here goes LAUSD again making a desperate stab in the dark to make changes with little data to support it,” said mother Jennifer Marquez, who has two children in a San Pedro elementary school. “I think families were defeated again and students are being treated like nothing more than test scores. I know many families that are upset over this and wonder if LAUSD knows that they may end up losing more students over this decision.”

Seventeen high schools – driven by their principals – urged Cortines to allow them to begin school early this past fall so that its students could end their first semester before the winter break.

Many administrators believe adding three weeks to the beginning of the year – and loping off June, which one principal called a “dead” month, would raise student test scores. Most of the year is dedicated to working toward the test, which are taken in May. After that, both teachers and students are exhausted, school officials said.

Linda Del Cueto, the superintendent who heads 14 of the high schools that started early this year, said while she’s heard few complaints she has not been able yet to delve into the data of how successful the early start has been.

At the end of the semester, Del Cueto said they will be able to look at students grades, but test scores will be unavailable until the summer.

(Diana Chapman has been a writer/journalist for nearly thirty years. She has written for magazines, newspapers and the best-seller series, Chicken Soup for the Soul. You can reach her at: hartchap@cox.net or her website theunderdogforkids.blogspot.com ) -cw

12/17/2010 - Today is the deadline for nearly a half-million Los Angeles Unified parents to take advantage of a little-known federal program that allows students at low-performing schools to transfer to a better campus.

More than 400,000 LAUSD students are eligible for the federal "Public School Choice" program, established under the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

Under the program, students at Program Improvement schools - those that have missed federal academic benchmarks for at least two consecutive years - can apply for a transfer to any other district campus that has available space.

Despite the obvious benefits of this program, fewer than 1 percent of the eligible LAUSD students took advantage of the program last year.

In an effort to give more students an opportunity for academic success, a group of community organizations and LAUSD board members have come together to promote the program.

"Parents with children in Program Improvement schools need to know that they have options," said Oscar Cruz, vice president of Families In Schools, a non-profit agency that promotes parental involvement.

"LAUSD and Families in Schools are working together to ensure that parents understand that they have options, which can have an enormous impact on their children's future," added Cruz.

Other than applying for a spot at a magnet campus, most LAUSD parents have few alternatives to their neighborhood schools. And many are unaware of the federal school choice program.

"Knowledge is power for parents, too," said Monica Garcia, president of the LAUSD board. "All parents have the right and responsibility to know what options are available for their child. We must work together to reach every family."

Parents and guardians should have received the CHOICES brochure in the mail during the second week of November. Applications are also available at LAUSD schools, the local district office, or at any Los Angeles public library.

Parents must complete LAUSD's CHOICES application, which is also used to apply for magnet schools, and select the Public School Choice option.

The form must be turned in by the end of today to be eligible for a transfer for the 2011-12 school year.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

December 16, 2010 05:07 PM - "Good morning class. Before I begin, let me just say that this section of Biology 101 is brought to you by the makers of genuine Bayer aspirin. If you get a headache from this class, remember to reach for Bayer -- the brand doctors trust! Now, if you can please open your text books to chapter three."

Far-fetched? Maybe not.

The cash-starved Los Angeles Unified School District has chosen the path of least resistance to the corporate world at a time when companies are anxious to get their hands on the young minds of school children at the earliest age possible.

The board is apparently going ahead with plans to seek corporate sponsors for such things as school auditoriums and athletic fields. Off limits, at least for now: corporate promotions for alcohol, tobacco and firearms, according to the New York Times. Well, thank God for that, right?!

Imagine how embarrassing it would be if the next time there is a campus shooting, it turns out the weapon used was actually sponsored by some gun maker?

Ramon Cortines, the L.A. schools superintendent, is quoted by the LA Times as saying, "we're not going to put advertising where it offends."

Really? Well, Mr. Cortines, that sort of misses the point, doesn't it? The point is, all corporate advertising in school in order to raise cash offends. Doesn't matter where it is.

The pity is, the LAUSD is willing to sell its soul to the devil in exchange for very little money, really.

School district officials are quoted as projecting potential ad revenue at about $18 million. The operating budget for the district, however, is reportedly about $5.4 billion.

So, any money raised by corporate advertising is a drop in the bucket, in exchange for a bucket of KFC chicken potentially plastering its logo on a school's cafeteria's walls.

Some might argue, especially teachers facing layoffs, that better this than have more cutbacks.

I doubt it.

Opening up LA's schools to corporate sponsorship is a major step in a very wrong direction. Students are better off with more crowded classrooms than they are with minds crowded with corporate logos.

Charles Feldman is a journalist, media consultant and co-author of the book, "No Time To Think-The Menace of Media Speed and the 24-hour News Cycle." He has covered politics and police in L.A. since 1995 and is a regular contributor of investigative reports to KNX1070 Newsradio.

16 December 2011 – 1:26 PM -It's not every day that the White House reaches out to universities or colleges—and ﻿Occidental College﻿, its most famous alumnus notwithstanding, is hardly an exception. But on the morning of Dec. 15, that's exactly what the White House did: Two top federal government officials participated in a live, online discussion with a nine-member group of college students and grassroots youth leaders at Oxy.

Bob Gottlieb, professor and director of the Urban and Environmental Policy Institute, alongside Los Angeles Deputy Mayor Romel Pascual, delivered opening remarks and then turned the forum over to the nine panel members.

Juan Carlos Garibay, a ﻿UCLA﻿ ﻿doctoral student in environmental justice who is associated with the Coalition for a Safe Environment, a nonprofit community organization based in Wilmington, CA, asked the federal officials about efforts to address "a public health crisis in predominantly Latino lower-class" communities of Wilmington.

The crisis, said Garibay, exists "because of the lack of action on the part of this government." He referred to diesel particulates as the cause of a "disproportionate amount of our residents having asthma, heart disease, cancer and other health-related diseases." Why, he asked Jackson and Sutley, ﻿have environmental justice organizations "not been asked to participate in the writing process of bills that guarantee that the health of our children is at the forefront of all relevant pieces of legislation?"

In her response, Jackson said she agreed with Garibay. Environmental justice communities "should be heard from and included and consulted as regulations are being done," she said, adding that just last month the EPA created "Plan EJ 2014," a community outreach initiative aimed at improving environmental and health conditions in under-developed communities. "EPA now has, for the first time in its 40 year history, a process which is part of the skeleton of the agency," Jackson said.

As an eighth-grader at Stevenson Middle School in East Los Angeles, Manny Gaona, 13, was the youngest participant in the forum. For the past year and a half, ﻿he has been working with ﻿East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice﻿, an organization that trains activists in Southeast Los Angeles to improve health and environmental conditions in their communities. "We've really been working hard to get our neighborhood to be safer and walkable and bikable [so that] we can do what we want without being afraid of being hit by a car," said Gaona, who was recently received a "Rising Leader" award by East Yard﻿. ﻿

Being hit by a car is a serious issue in his neighborhood, Gaona said, referring to an incident in which a car recently hit an elderly woman on her way home from church. Such mishaps have prompted Gaona to attend two commission hearings with the Board of Highway Safety. Partly because of his efforts, alongside those of the community, said Gaona, ﻿1st District Los Angeles County Supervisor﻿ Gloria Molina﻿ recently announced a plan to conduct a six-month to nine-month "comprehensive traffic calming study," which would introduce measures to make traffic less dangerous in the Union Pacific neighborhood of East Los Angeles.

After Washington signed off and the myriad laptops on display were shut, Deputy Mayor ﻿Pascual pointed out that the forum had put the panel members, most of whom were students, at "only two degrees of separation from President Obama," who spent his first two years of college at Oxy before transferring to Columbia University. Pascual said he was proud of the young adults, and reminded them "very few people have this opportunity."

Oxy Professor Gottlieb added that he was pleased that the event taught his students how to "frame a question and give it background." Oxy's UEPI is renowned not only for its faculty, one of whom, Martha Matsuoka, is currently working in Washington D.C., but for its emphasis on community engagement, said Gottlieb.